PAMman Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 Has anyone reached a conclusion on the relative quality of these 2 reps? I don't have either (yet) and I'm not concerned about minor resolvable issues such as dust under the crystal etc but I am mainly thinking of the smooth operation of the rotating bezel. I am assuming that this is probably the main area of potential difficulty arising from poor machining or tolerances. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratedzeus Posted January 31, 2008 Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 [RWcc Exclusive] IWC Aquatimer 3719 vs Cousteau Divers 2006 http://replica-watch.cc/forum/index.php?topic=1222.0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAMman Posted January 31, 2008 Author Report Share Posted January 31, 2008 [RWcc Exclusive] IWC Aquatimer 3719 vs Cousteau Divers 2006 http://replica-watch.cc/forum/index.php?topic=1222.0 Thanks for that. Anyone else with any thoughts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanikai Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 OK PamM... instead of giving you my opinion.. I'll try to give you the data so you can decipher for your self what you want to do.. ..... OK family photo .. if it were just for the aesthetics it would be a hard call .. they all have their own uniqueness .... this would be the inner bezel at a half click .. to align it properly .. it will slide out eventually.. .... this is the alignment on the last click .. so we are short of proper alignment ergo you have to manually align it to half a turn.. .... same with the previous Cousteau.. half a click will align it note:.. the inner bezel on both CD's .."hops" a little when turning it too quickly.. but it is not loose when stationary ....the Slevin on the other hand is spot on ,.. it does have a fraction of a mm "play"but when the crown at the 4 is turned all the way it flushes with the chrono hand and 12 marker the function of the bezel when turning is 100% improved over the previous 2 cousteau's IMO .. the inner bezel is flat black on the slevin (FYI) so .... Pam .. your major question is regarding the inner bezel.. because IMO all other comparisons ... all three are very, very good quality as far as dial, crown , pushers , all are "solid' but the one defining difference is the inner bezel.. there is no comparison .. slevin hands down.. ....notice out of the box the day date on the slevin is much better in alignment than the CD 06 and 07.. but this is a mute point as they need to be swapped with the genuine ETA.. if you so choose.. just an example of perhaps a little better attention to detail from the maker of the slevin.. ...... aesthetically the 06 has a flat finish in the subs ... while the 07 has very defined concentric rings in the subs .. note also the orange in the 07 is more of a burnt orange than the digital orange in the pic.. also flat in colour On the slevins sub dials you will get a satin glow since the subs are lightly ringed.. but harder to discern because of the black dial.. the AR coating on the CD's are excellent .. maybe not as good as chieftang or K2222 as far as quality but very good by industry standards..however the slevin is lacking double AR it looks like single .. and if it is double .. (leaving room for the benefit of the doubt) it is in fact very very weak. the crystal on the Slevin has a higher apex on the dome as it is smaller in diameter than the CD's, this may add to the weaker AR look that already exists..but fixable, chieftang or k222 .. better that ...than the bezel... ... AR .. almost a none entity the weight on all three are exellent... I am no expert on the case backs (nor the watch for that matter) so i will leave that to the members more knowlegable the slevin has the Rubber strap which is softer than the CD.. which in my opinion before the Porsche Flat six and the Paul Picot chrono came out was the best rep strap (CD's) .. bar none... it is better than the slevin ... but what makes the slevin very different in my opinion is the bracelet... .... so you have a pros and cons .. all three are well made but the inner bezel is the major contributor to the Slevin being more mechaically sound ... so what would you rather have as far as a flaw ... IMO is the question.. I've probably left out some concerns so if any questions .. let me know .. i will do my best to get you the A aloha, Lani Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rogerthat Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Great post Lani Very informative and on point Cheers, M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yellomen Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Thanx Lanikai... nice review of this Aquatimer trilogy! And congrats with all three pieces Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scoobs1971 Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Thnx Lanikai, very informative! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takashi Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 (edited) Look at what is beneath the Slevin: So much so for attention to details... but look what's powering these watches. Buyer beware. These are 2 different movements from 2 different watches (Slevin). Didn't happen at all to at least 2 Cousteaus which I own, bought at different time line. If you read further, there are certain areas which Cousteau showing its aces. PS: great perspective Lanikai! But I have to disagree on your verdict. Cousteau is the winner here (by a slight margin).... If you are looking for accuracy, CD wins too. You try reluming that Slevin bezel... not an easy task. Another AR coating job, cost more $$$. So out of box, CD wins. In terms of pricing too, even the cartel has reduced CD below Slevin. Edited February 1, 2008 by takashi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PAMman Posted February 1, 2008 Author Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Thanks very much for the submissions. I will probably have a Swiss 7750 dropped into whichever one I get so the movement doesn't worry me too much. However, a misaligned bezel would probably irritae me and it would have to sit totally off 12 o'clock rather than simply misaligned a tad. The general build quality was my main concern and to be honest I am undecided. Story of my life - that's why I have so many watches. Maybe this will end up with 2 more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryaku Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Taka , is it a 28.8 7750? I just ordered and i'm a little concerned considering the high price. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
capice Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 nice explanation Lanakai and Taka, very informative, tnx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pammo13 Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 (edited) Movement is cheaper ,but price is higher? Edited February 1, 2008 by pammo13 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanikai Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 @Takashi .... were the 2 slevins from the same collector ? And are they of basically the same quality movements ? It's my understanding that these reps are stalled in part because of the availability of sourcing enough movements, so at times whatever movements (if they are of equal quality) can be sourced may be used.. but not for the purpose of more profit.. And to clarify my post not to debate it ... the question was posed as to mainly the inner bezel.. so I presented the "facts". and the truth of the fact is the slevin has the better inner bezel component.... When I post these comparisons it is to give the members the opportunity to judge for themselves which rep they would like or not like... watches , like women are a personal choice, ..some like only one .... others like a variety ... and others like them all The later two are if you are single and unattached (disclaimer) So I am not saying the Slevin is a better overall rep ... if I had to choose .. I take all three I like the 06 for it's basic style ..... the 07 for the added look of the sub dials and colour .... and the slevin for the inner bezel and bracelet... so what does that mean ... that I'm a good judge of reps......or ... I'm easy but not cheap ... again I'll let you decide...... Oh and one other thing... how does everyone get such good close ups without blurring out the pic ? i can't find my manual for my camera... yup I was one of those kids that didn't like to use instructions when building my models Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanikai Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 nice explanation Lanakai and Taka, very informative, tnx what capice.. no "wtf".. kidding man,...kidding ... don't fuc88ing do it man... Add on: thanks guy's for getting me off "wtf" on my user name... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takashi Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 All is cool. Like you said lanikai, I love both CD version 2006 and 2007. It comes to the point that I put 2 ETA7750 on both watches. I agree with bezel construction but if you read my comparison review, you will find the culprit is the plate on inner movement retainer ring. It can be fixed that both inner bezel to be perfectly alligned at 12 o'clock position just by slightly bending it inwards and using a little bit of sandpaper grinding. In this way, you can live without having your pusher "halfway stuck". @ryaku: yes this movement is Asian 7750 which comes on Slevin. I am not saying that it won't happen on CD as well but I can see that this movement is certainly different from the CD (although they look the same). They do come from the same source more or less. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toadtorrent Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Oh and one other thing... how does everyone get such good close ups without blurring out the pic ? i can't find my manual for my camera... yup I was one of those kids that didn't like to use instructions when building my models Hey Lanikai, You may think that my response below is me being generous with knowledge, but it's actually quite self-serving. I read your posts all the time...and love them. If you turn to a photo-guru like Pug or By-Tor, or all the others, then hey...that's good for me and everyone. Clarity on closeups is a combination of a lot of stuff. In point form: =================== TRIPOD =================== - Use a timer if it all possible so you don't get the shake of the camera during long exposures when you press the release - Long exposures using available light (ie. no flash) mean ability to have better Depth of Field (see below) - The steadier the camera the clearer the image =================== MINIMUM FOCUS DISTANCE =================== - Every camera has a minimum distance you need to be from the object in question - Go TOO close...and you will have a fuzzy picture - Better Macro cameras/lenses allow a closer minimum focus distance ==================== DEPTH OF FIELD ==================== - This will determine how much is in focus essentially (relative to foreground/background) - Determined by aperature (f-stop) - A change in f-stop has a great visual impact in macro photography...and the usual deal for lots in focus is to have a larger f-stop - Serious macro lenses may go f-32 or f-64 I think - If you have manual or aperature priority capability, this will give you greater control - Shallow DOF is good for highlighting a particular section of a movement...greater DOF is better for making up for pushing minimum distance, or ensuring more of the object is in focus, or making up for difficult focussing because of crappy viewfinders/screens ====================== ISO/ASA and LIGHTING ====================== - If you use a point-and-shoot digital, the pictures usually become significantly grainier or noisier above ISO 160...so you need to stay below this...which in turn means you need more light - More light may mean more glare which means the image isn't as clear - Softening flashes helps immensely with this...hence people using "lightboxes" so you don't get the "hot spot" with the flash...especially on shiny 316L stainless steel - Digital SLRs are usually waaaaay better for having minimal noise at high ISOs. I've had great results with minimal noise when using a Nikon D200 with an ISO setting of 3200 ====================== LENS SHARPNESS ====================== - The more expensive pro-grade lenses have a fixed aperature of f-2.8 throughout entire zoom ranges, and have really tack sharp glass - The better the glass, the clearer the image There's more...but this will usually hit most of the bases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takashi Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 For the pictures, you can switch to macro mode. It helps a lot to show details. However, good light source is very important too. Sometimes my picture will look brownish/yellowish, this comes from my desk light bulb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lanikai Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 Cho Sugoi Takashi san... thanks for the great info.. now because of your post I "will have to" get that Nikon I have been trying to talk myself out of... got some pics to show us how to do the deal on the inner bezel? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
takashi Posted February 1, 2008 Report Share Posted February 1, 2008 I will try to get some pictures on the "new, modified" movement retainer ring on CD2007. Anyway, if you remove that plate, you won't have any problem with alignment but bezel will not have click anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.